Europe and GA... well, in the broader context, Europe today is a deeply divided continent with several countries within the EU striving for hegemonial power. With the economic crisis and the terrible state of the EU as a whole, a lot of people loose out and need a guilty party. Politicians these days point their fingers at the presumably "rich", which is basically anyone who does not fight for survival on a daily basis. Add to that an envy driven society, which has always shunned those who got of their behinds and actually achived something rather than sitting on the same and wait for benefits, you got the perfect breeding ground for a society of bigotry and intolerance which makes up todays European policymakers.
That is why the state of European GA depends not on all of the European countries but primarily on some of them who are in fact controlling the Union as much as EASA. It has been my impression that JAR and EASA Rules, which should have been a harmonisation of existing rules, ended up by being a compilation of them as well as "the sum of all fears" so to speak. Each country threw in it's pet rules and restrictions until the sum of them became what we have today. Add to that the fact that some of the controlling countries were and are represented by people who grew up behind the Iron curtain and you get the picture.
The FAA of course had a very different rulemaking approach. Yet, it is not without fault and, especcially recently, the wind of change is blowing from Washington all over the US. It is only thanks to the tremendous lobby our American friends have that some recent administrations have not managed to subdue GA to the extent it was and is done here. The political will to do so is there!
What (used to) set Europe apart from the US? The old story goes on about the two fathers with their sons, one European, one American, who visit a GA show and stand before a lovely airplane. Sais the European: "See, my son, this is where the filthy rich spend their money on the back of all of us poor workers". Sais the American: "My son, if you never loose your dream and work hard, one of these can be yours!" It's been told many times but it is pretty much what happens. MANY Europeans, by far not all but too many, are today living an angry, unbalanced and jealous life full of anger and distrust. A lot of that has to do with the economic crisis, but not only. When I started flying in '83, I was reading the aviation mags of the time and saw the rulemaking and problems in our neighbouring states with total lack of comprehension and wondering "how can they live like that." Today I sometimes watch TV about the controlled and regulated lifes people have, neighbours spying on each other, outright wars at the office, politics with a fierceness which leaves this Swiss guy regularly asking myself the same question! And then I watch European aviation forums and see the same thing there!! Pilots who will tell others not to buy their own airplane "because it's just not done", because "it will ruin you", because it's "socially insensitive". Hello? Pilots and even owners talking like that?
Is it socially insensitive if I spend 20k Euros for a 45 year old travel plane while those who point fingers at me for being a "filthy rich" jet setter drive 50k Euro BMWs? Is it "not done" because it might, heaven help, upset one neighbour who has made different choices and now is not happy with them? So he has to vent all his frustration on those who managed to do something with their lifes?
It has to be said that today we say "Europe" is like that. Only that Europe as a unity does not exist. There are many countries in which flying is a delight and no problem at all for the majority of the population. There are countries who don't care. There are some few but powerful who would love to have aviation restricted to what was possible in the GDR or the Soviet Union, where all flying was done by the state. Whose mindset has never made the leap from a unfree society to the liberties free citizens are used to.
There still are exceptions. And often enough, the government policy towards or against GA does not reflect in the actual GA scene. Germany is one example. To fly there with GA planes, VFR or IFR is mostly very enjoyable, but Germany is one of the strictest countries where you will land yourself in deep do do very fast by just not flying a VFR traffic circuit within the imagined tolerances these people have. They will fine someone like that higher than someone who exceeds speed limits in closed villages by double. And there are hundreds of "volonteers" who will write up your registration from the ground and report you to the authorities for overflying their houses. Regional governments issue rules on their own, so what's legal in one Bundesland is not in the other. How can they live like that? France has always been a great GA country and still is, actually France may be instrumental in finally getting an European IR which is achievable. Yet, the current administration is headed by a socialist extremist. Will it stay that way? Already now, the withdrawal of "airports of entry" to many aerodromes in France make it an inaccessible place for UK or Swiss pilots. In Italy, large parts of the country are Airspaces A, aircraft owners are targetet relentlessly by the taxman. Greece same thing, even though they do realize down there that SOME boats and planes might be needed to reach the islands. The list goes on and on. My personal favorites to fly in at the moment are the Southeastern European states of Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and so on, where GA seems to be regarded as a fact of life rather than the enemy. Interestingly, some of the world's best and most profitable GA plants are now in Austria as well as Slovakia and Checkia.
While in the US, celebrities like Harrison Ford and John Travolta promote aviation, those in Europe who sport a pilots license or even a plane hide their flying passion from the public. We lack those who have the courage to step forward, because they also fear that it is politically incorrect.
America however should beware. In recent years, calls are getting louder there too which only too well ressemble the socialist battlecries in cash strapped Europe. AOPA still holds the flag, but how long will it be able to defend aviation when that government is looking into taxing oil and fuel out of people's hands? Washington has in my perception been looking far to closely to Europe as an example, instead of the other way around. Politicians will always do what gives them most power and they can just see with wonder in their eyes how Europe is run by very few people very effectively and totally outside the democratic process.
Enough ranting already.
The irony being that social mobility is higher in much of Europe than in the US.
Money and ownership is what matters in the USA. When they are distributed based on merit and enjoyed without social penalty or reward it both annoys some Europeans and makes their view of social stratification irrelevant.
I'm quite happy to own two aircraft outright, bought with money I earned through straightforward work. What social strata this puts me in is not important to me, or hopefully anybody else.
As Neil says, it is the politics of envy.
The socialists governments of Europe impose taxes wherever they can. Allocation of the taxes revenues collected in aviation are not transparent as they are in the US. Should AvGas be USD14$/gallon in the US, GA would simply disappear. Unfortunately Europe thinks small.
I think we're talking at cross purposes slightly; when I refer to social mobility I'm not talking about class in the old aristocracy v. servant sense. I'm talking about money:
In America, if you work hard, you're pretty unlikely to get rich unless your parents are already rich.
In Europe, if you work hard, you may just get rich even if your parents were poor.
Obviously it's a relative thing: there are rags to riches stories on both continents. But there are also plenty of very hard-working, poor people.
Personally I don't buy the idea that envy has a lot to do with it - it doesn't seem to stop people in the UK from owning yachts, flashy cars or nice watches. To me, factors such as weather, distance, land prices and culture seem far more likely explanations. Especially as Europe is such a varied continent culturally. Heck, if you park a Porsche in the company car park, people will notice. Nobody will ever know you fly an aircraft unless you tell them.
Historically a lot of the drive behind GA comes from military and manufacturing. France had a post-war drive to push GA. In the UK, we have a lot of airfields left from the war and post-war, a lot of pilots were trained for the RAF or during national service. To my mind, these are better explanations of why GA does comparatively well in these two countries relative to other parts of Europe than the idea that envy is a lesser issue in the UK than elsewhere.
Yes, but they have no ICAO CofA, which means they cannot (in general) cross national borders.
This limitation has succesfully been challenged in a Dutch court earlier this year. In March 2012 someone tested this limitation written on the Speciaal Bewijs van Luchtwaardigheid (= in this case a special/experimental CofA for a classic aircraft).
The court decided that there was no basis in either Dutch or European law to prohibit Annex II aircraft from crossing borders without prior permission. To have to ask permission for each border crossing flight is at odds with free movement of people and goods within the European Union. The Dutch Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport (= Dutch CAA) was ordered to issue new CofA's without the limitation. I am not sure but I think the ILT can still appeal the verdict.
Some more info here. (Dutch only) Article in Dutch magazine
kwlf - there have been a lot of statistics recently about the relative difficulty of rising in financial wealth in the US. Its really very interesting because the statistics are much influenced by the amount of immigration by the ill educated and poor, entering with little money. Some of them do very well financially, others not so well, with huge differences depending on the culture where they came from.
I'll tell you this much: if you, presumably a European, came to the US you would have a relatively easy time building material wealth. Twenty five years ago I was the son of a European immigrant, in a family with no members that had been in school past age 16. Now I am modestly a millionaire, own a couple of houses, a couple of aircraft, and make three or four trips back to Europe every year. Others in my family have done much better than me, owning up to 10 houses outright.
I'm happy I can own interesting stuff here in the US, something I enjoy a lot, and fly every week or so. All far beyond what my father was able to do - his major achievement in my eyes was getting us here.
The court decided that there was no basis in either Dutch or European law to prohibit Annex II aircraft from crossing borders without prior permission. To have to ask permission for each border crossing flight is at odds with free movement of people and goods within the European Union
That is an astonishing result and one does wonder how much of the decades-old ICAO rulebook can be overturned in this way.
It's a great result of course, in this case, but using national or EU legislation to sidestep the fact that some country has signed up to ICAO could also work against GA in other areas.
For example I am convinced that if it wasn't for ICAO having signed up close to 200 countries, principally to facilitate commercial airline travel, GA would simply be banned in all countries in the world (most of them being military-ruled dictatorships to varying degrees), with the exceptions being the countries with a long tradition of personal freedom and pre-WW2 GA activity, and there aren't many of those even in Europe. Flying your own plane is one of the highest expressions of freedom and could never be allowed in any tightly run country 
(I come from Czechoslovakia - 1957-1969).
I know that various people have considered this route in cases of e.g. commercial pilot medicals, where some of the requirements are purely arbitrary and would never stand up against the various EU discrimination legislation, but AFAIK nobody has got anywhere with it.
There's talk of "rich" in this thread - what's "rich"? Is it defined by how much you have in assets? What's an asset? The car I drive is a very nice VW, but not a Porsche, 'cause I spent the other half of the value of the Porsche getting my helicopter license - is that an asset? - 'Can't sell it! My wife used to give me the evil eye for buying expensive antique Dinky Toys for my collection, until I pointed out that when I die, she can still sell those, the helicopter license died with me. I don't own the second house, but I paid for a lot of gas to get 6500 hours flying time over 35 years - is that an asset that makes me "rich"?
I'm not rich (by my standards, anyway), but I sure like my life, and aviation is a big part of it. I have tailored things to accommodate aircraft at home, and it gives me just what I have always dreamed of. But I made it that way by choice and effort. My choice is that going flying is easy for me to do. From sitting in my house typing this, I can be airborne within 5 minutes and back here 15 minutes later, 'cause I want it that way. When the real estate people heard that I built a runway here, they told me that I had reduced the value of the land by doing so. Fortunately, their opinion is of little interest to me!
Opportunity is there for me to enjoy aviation the way I like to, by the nature of Canadian regulation. For that, I pay my taxes, vote every few years, do my best to stay within those regulations, and make the airplane a plus to the community..
I make a point of using the plane for the public good when I can, and assuring that "the public" know that aviation improved things that day. It seems to have mitigated any local unwelcome for airplanes. So here, airplanes and the community seem at peace, and to appreciate each other. Perhaps people think I have lots of money, 'cause I have a plane. Ha! the planes are two of my lesser assets, they just seem to convey "rich". The community knows I'm not rich, I'm just "airplane Jim" who will go and look for a lost cow if asked, and searches for lost boaters on the local lakes when the call comes out.
Within 10 miles of my home runway, there are 8 other private runways, and one fairly busy airport, which has been a fixture for more than 40 years. And, contrary to rumours about Canada, our roads are just fine, so around here, we don't have to fly, we just choose to.
Perhaps there are Canadians who are jealous of private aircraft owners, if there are, I don't think I have met them. I know Canadians who are jealous of those who can afford to waste expensive gasoline driving Hummers around as personal vehicles.
I can't speak to how people in Europe accept general aviation, I have too little experience in Europe to know. But, from what I read on PPRuNe, it would seem that aviation is charged out to pilots at full cost and then some, and thereafter taxed something like a luxury. If planes were luxuries, they would have nice seats, good heaters and a quiet cabin like my VW! Perhaps if the general public in Europe were more exposed to general aviation, they'd realize that it's not luxurious, and they'd like it more!
I don't know about the US but I can say the following about 2 european countries - UK and Germany. In Germany, GA is generally perceived to be the enclave of the well off (but not the rich or the mighty - they have their own jets and pilots) and wealth as such, although not excessive, is something to be frowned upon. This attitude prevails throughout companies in Germany who ban employees from talking about their salaries yet in the US, it's common for employees to discuss their incomes, their perks and bonuses. Anybody flying must earn lots of money and is probably doing that by exploiting his slaves - sorry, his employees - at least, that's the way I feel. And once they have swallowed that feeling, then comes the envy.... How come HE can do that and I can't??? Just a glance at the Bonn Hangelar Traffic Circuit shows this has been created with a view to killing off GA.
In the UK, things are different - during the Thatcher years the government tried to get wealth creation in UK more accepted but nowadays after a couple of decades of politically correct liberal minded interfering busybodies all poking their oar in, it's even more frowned upon than before. On top of this, I sincerely get the feeling that, over the past 15 years, anything which is "fun" has been taxed in an attempt to eliminate it or ensure that only the super rich can enjoy it......
